Evidence of imminent USHPA COLLAPSE?: What I see happening, if the UShawks find insurance, is a mass migration of pilots to the UShawks or to whoever has something in place for them to continue flying. They are not going to care about who has been defamed by who. They are just going to want to keep flying.What happens to the paragliders? They are going to have to start their own thing or cross over to hang gliding. With the high paraglider accident stats they are going to find it hard to secure insurance I would think.I find it ironic that the collapse of USHPA could actually be a boon for the growth of hang gliding in the USA if things play out in this manner.

Hang gliding suffers from a perception it has created. Although each state has recreational sporting laws on the books that protect private landowners and hold states, counties and municipalities harmless for informal sporting activities, the USHGA and later, the USHPA, pushed their own formal third-party liability insurance where ever hang gliding was practiced as a method to lock in membership. If you think this view is too cynical, I would ask how much effort has the association spent asserting recreational sporting law as an alternative to 3PL? This is the big opportunity for the US Hawks: to start building a track record of securing sites under recreational sporting law rather than pushing 3PL insurance - particularly because it is becoming unobtainable due to USHGA/USHPA over-reach in combining a greater number of claims from parachuting (paragliding), joyriding and business-related accidents. The situation at Torrey Pines appears to be a supreme example of how 3PL can be used to enrich some who take financial advantage of this legal fabrication. It has been pointed out again and again on these pages that personal responsibility under law is sufficient for virtually all other sports from bicycling to surfing when practiced as individual recreational pursuits. Why is hang gliding singled out? Perhaps, in many cases, it is because hang glider pilots themselves mistakenly believe that it has to be. They have accepted as gospel the big lie that all extreme wind sports, including commercial aspects, need to be brought together under one 3PL insurance umbrella when this is absolutely the worst thing that could be ever done for the freedom of the sport.

Quote:

What happens to the paragliders?

The various forms of parachuting need not be a concern of hang glider pilots. It's a different sport. And this should be emphasized when necessary. Hang glider pilots must put their interests ahead of other sports. This can only be done through a hang gliding association that is actually a hang gliding association.

-- Form a national hang gliding association because we really need one! --

Thanks for the compliment of this topic. I haven't followed the EU situation closely, but Nigel's comments make a lot of sense to me.

Rick Masters wrote:

Hang gliding suffers from a perception it has created. Although each state has recreational sporting laws on the books that protect private landowners and hold states, counties and municipalities harmless for informal sporting activities, the USHGA and later, the USHPA, pushed their own formal third-party liability insurance where ever hang gliding was practiced as a method to lock in membership. If you think this view is too cynical, I would ask how much effort has the association spent asserting recreational sporting law as an alternative to 3PL?

Not too cynical at all. The answer to your question is zero. USHPA isn't interested in "Recreational Use" because USHPA is controlled by business owners who aren't covered by Recreational Use statutes for their business activities. Because they control USHPA, they have concocted this scheme to get individual pilots to cover the costs of their businesses.

Rick Masters wrote:

This is the big opportunity for the US Hawks: to start building a track record of securing sites under recreational sporting law rather than pushing 3PL insurance - particularly because it is becoming unobtainable due to USHGA/USHPA over-reach in combining a greater number of claims from parachuting (paragliding), joyriding and business-related accidents. The situation at Torrey Pines appears to be a supreme example of how 3PL can be used to enrich some who take financial advantage of this legal fabrication. It has been pointed out again and again on these pages that personal responsibility under law is sufficient for virtually all other sports from bicycling to surfing when practiced as individual recreational pursuits.

Absolutely true. USHPA has put this burden on hang gliding to reinforce its monopoly. It's also important to remember that USHGA was formed before the widespread implementation of Recreational Use statutes. So USHGA insurance might have filled a needed role at that time. However, that time has passed, and now USHPA is using its insurance monopoly more to control the sport than to grow the sport (see "Felicium/Symbiosis": "After T'Jon and Romas take their doses, Dr. Crusher realises that Felicium is actually a highly addictive narcotic, and the plague itself was cured long ago.").

Rick Masters wrote:

Why is hang gliding singled out? Perhaps, in many cases, it is because hang glider pilots themselves mistakenly believe that it has to be. They have accepted as gospel the big lie that all extreme wind sports, including commercial aspects, need to be brought together under one 3PL insurance umbrella when this is absolutely the worst thing that could be ever done for the freedom of the sport.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 5 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum